Is our reality just a construction?

Discuss any topics related to metaphysics (the philosophical study of the principles of reality) or epistemology (the philosophical study of knowledge) in this forum.
User avatar
Angelo Cannata
Posts: 182
Joined: April 17th, 2021, 10:02 am
Favorite Philosopher: Heidegger
Location: Cambridge, UK
Contact:

Re: Is our reality just a construction?

Post by Angelo Cannata »

Pattern-chaser wrote: May 21st, 2022, 8:56 am We don't need to assume that reality exists; we can prove it.
I don't think you can prove that reality exists: any evidence found by you will be instantly interpreted by your brain and by my brain, so, what we can have access to is only an interpretation made by our brain. Anyway, you think you can prove it, I am curious to know it.
Atla
Posts: 2540
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: Is our reality just a construction?

Post by Atla »

Angelo Cannata wrote: May 21st, 2022, 6:50 am
GrayArea wrote: May 21st, 2022, 6:32 am I believe the outside world and the self are connected.
How can you say that there is an outside world, since the only way we have to check this is our brain asking our brain? We cannot make questions without using our brain and we cannot make answers without using our brain. So, it is always our brain talking to himself and telling himself that there is an external world out there. How can we trust our brain saying this to himself? We should also consider that the belief in the existence of an external world is a powerful instrument to impose one’s own opinions, so we need to be suspicious about anybody saying that there is a world out there: this is a powerful instrument for them to avert the suspicion that it is just their opinion, that as such is highly questionable.
Indeed we can never prove the existence of the outside world, that's pretty obvious.

But the opinion that there is an outside world, isn't highly questionable. This opinion is perfectly consistent with the contents of the mind.

What is weird is that many people find it highly questionable. (As usual I blame Kant, but that's nothing new.)
True philosophy points to the Moon
User avatar
Angelo Cannata
Posts: 182
Joined: April 17th, 2021, 10:02 am
Favorite Philosopher: Heidegger
Location: Cambridge, UK
Contact:

Re: Is our reality just a construction?

Post by Angelo Cannata »

Atla wrote: May 21st, 2022, 12:21 pm But the opinion that there is an outside world, isn't highly questionable. This opinion is perfectly consistent with the contents of the mind.

What is weird is that many people find it highly questionable. (As usual I blame Kant, but that's nothing new.)
I agree, because you called it "opinion": when we clarify that we don't consider our statements as certainties, but just hypotheses, then we can say whatever we want and we don't need evidence of anything.
User avatar
GrayArea
Posts: 374
Joined: March 16th, 2021, 12:17 am

Re: Is our reality just a construction?

Post by GrayArea »

Angelo Cannata wrote: May 21st, 2022, 12:02 pm
GrayArea wrote: May 21st, 2022, 7:53 am Therefore, I say that reality is not a construct.
I can't see how you jump to that conclusion: all the premises you wrote say that everything is a construct, but at the end you conclude the opposite.
Or perhaps I should say, I "think" that reality is not a construct.
People perceive gray and argue about whether it's black or white.
User avatar
Kks
Posts: 6
Joined: May 21st, 2022, 9:03 pm

Re: Is our reality just a construction?

Post by Kks »

We are our brain. And conflicts inside our heads mainly about creation of our own life. Everyone has their version of “reality” This question could be answered by your own self and it have but for some reason you not satisfied with it. And inner “disagreement “ seeks confirmation from outside. No matter who said what it will be not your reality at this time unless you find agreement outside. Then you will make your new reality. Internal conflicts between different Brains in your head creating reality as you see.
But if we only could master this conflicts and bring alignment by wisdom. We could be creating desired reality
And most importantly we would know our desires.

I believe we looking into outside world asking for confirmation to satisfy our reptilian brain’s needs under illusions of act of consciousness and never get real satisfaction. Only wisdom can help us find better purposes and satisfaction and that come with practicing of knowledge and denial of this need for confirmation. That mean switch receiving mindset to serving.
So I can’t hate on concept of selfishness….

Reality created in our heads and it’s quality depending on if we become peacemakers or victims of conflicts in our head.

Sorry I am foreign so my English writing can be very confusing.
User avatar
Angelo Cannata
Posts: 182
Joined: April 17th, 2021, 10:02 am
Favorite Philosopher: Heidegger
Location: Cambridge, UK
Contact:

Re: Is our reality just a construction?

Post by Angelo Cannata »

Kks wrote: May 21st, 2022, 10:04 pm We are our brain. And conflicts inside our heads mainly about creation of our own life. Everyone has their version of “reality” This question could be answered by your own self and it have but for some reason you not satisfied with it. And inner “disagreement “ seeks confirmation from outside. No matter who said what it will be not your reality at this time unless you find agreement outside. Then you will make your new reality. Internal conflicts between different Brains in your head creating reality as you see.
But if we only could master this conflicts and bring alignment by wisdom. We could be creating desired reality
And most importantly we would know our desires.

I believe we looking into outside world asking for confirmation to satisfy our reptilian brain’s needs under illusions of act of consciousness and never get real satisfaction. Only wisdom can help us find better purposes and satisfaction and that come with practicing of knowledge and denial of this need for confirmation. That mean switch receiving mindset to serving.
So I can’t hate on concept of selfishness….

Reality created in our heads and it’s quality depending on if we become peacemakers or victims of conflicts in our head.

Sorry I am foreign so my English writing can be very confusing.
What you have said seems very important to me, because in latest days I have been thinking of something very similar. I'll try to explain now.
A lot of discussions about reality, we can even say all of them, come from having assumed the objective existence of reality as a starting point that conditions entirely the whole of subsequent discussions. Let's experiment what happens if we assume the opposite, that is subjectivity, as a starting point. We are subjects, we make our thoughts, we know that everything is our opinion created by our brains. What happens next? Competition is what happens, with other subjects and with objects. Since whatever we say and do is, in this first stage, socially agreed as opinion, competition makes us look for weapons to win competitions, weapon to compensate the weakness of our being opinions: I am just an opinion, you are just an opinion. In order to defy this weakness and find a weapon, we need something with which we can make the other competitors believe that what we say and do is not just our opinion, is not just an expression of our subjectivity. What will this weapon be, what will be not subjective? In need for thia weapon, we invented objectivity. Objectivity is nothing but our opinion dressed up as something that is not our opinion. This is objectivity: it is simply the denial that something is just our opinion, nothing else. Objectivity is simply a weapon denying our subjectivity, in order to prevail in competitions. Objectivity is imposed through threatening and violence, like saying: you must believe that I am objectively stronger than you, otherwise you will suffer unpleasant consequences.
This mechanism of competition reveals valid not only between subjects, but also in the relationship with non-living subjects, like, for example, a stone that is falling on my head. This way we can realise that competition, instinct to prevail is not something exclusive of living beings. A stone, a chair, a pen, an atom have inside them the same force that makes them continuously try to prevail.
Now the key question is: how can I tell a stone falling on me that her threat is just her opinion? The key point of this question is that now we are strongly tempted to say that we know that, considering the falling stone as an opinion, will have our death as a result. The concept of knowing contains inside it a giving up, an acceptance that something is not our opinion, it is objective. We can react to this trick of the language by saying to the stone "I know that you will kill me, but I don't know if a different perspective, a different interpretation is possible. I am defeated for now, I am forced to protect myself from you, but I won't stop exploring different interpretations". Exploring how a falling stone is just an opinion of that stone seems crazy to our minds used to give up in these fights. The stone has been able to win because she has been able to make us think that there is only one alternative, that is thinking that the falling stone is an illusion, that would have our death as a result. What about other alternatives? What about interpreting the whole situation in an artistic way? Ok, we don't see at the moment how a falling stone could be actually not falling, but we can add art and this way we can get a little victory against the force of the stone wanting us not to think of anything else than the inesorability of its fall. So, against the weapon and the power of objectivity, that tries 24 ours a day to convince us that we are fundamentally all enemies, all competitors to each other, we can oppose our exploration of the hermeneutics of subjectivity, that means an hermeneutics of weakness, peace, humility, helping each other rather than competing. We don't now so much how to do this with falling stones, because they are so rough, primitive, brutal, closed to dialog. But we can do a lot at higher levels of evolution, with plant, more with animals, much more between us. It is a different philosophy, certain philosophies like relativism, postmodermism, have already started to explore it; I would call it spirituality.
Atla
Posts: 2540
Joined: January 30th, 2018, 1:18 pm

Re: Is our reality just a construction?

Post by Atla »

Angelo Cannata wrote: May 21st, 2022, 1:03 pm
Atla wrote: May 21st, 2022, 12:21 pm But the opinion that there is an outside world, isn't highly questionable. This opinion is perfectly consistent with the contents of the mind.

What is weird is that many people find it highly questionable. (As usual I blame Kant, but that's nothing new.)
I agree, because you called it "opinion": when we clarify that we don't consider our statements as certainties, but just hypotheses, then we can say whatever we want and we don't need evidence of anything.
That's what people say who don't want to admit a difference between justified and unjustified opinions, so they can get away with their unjustified opinion.
True philosophy points to the Moon
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8268
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: Is our reality just a construction?

Post by Pattern-chaser »

Pattern-chaser wrote: May 21st, 2022, 8:56 am We don't need to assume that reality exists; we can prove it.
Angelo Cannata wrote: May 21st, 2022, 12:06 pm I don't think you can prove that reality exists: any evidence found by you will be instantly interpreted by your brain and by my brain, so, what we can have access to is only an interpretation made by our brain. Anyway, you think you can prove it, I am curious to know it.
OK, this is a bit of a derail, but I'll try to offer something brief. 👍

From Descartes' cogito, despite its failings, we can conclude that thoughts exist, or that awareness of those thoughts exists, or that the source of those thoughts exists; in short we can conclude that something exists, and therefore Objective Reality exists, and the thing that we originally identified as existing is all or part of it.

But that is the one and only thing we are able to prove (to Objective standards); all the rest is guesswork and supposition.

N.B. I can prove the above, to Objective standards, to myself alone. If you are to share my one piece of Objective knowledge, you must follow the same steps for yourself.
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
User avatar
Angelo Cannata
Posts: 182
Joined: April 17th, 2021, 10:02 am
Favorite Philosopher: Heidegger
Location: Cambridge, UK
Contact:

Re: Is our reality just a construction?

Post by Angelo Cannata »

Pattern-chaser wrote: May 22nd, 2022, 8:53 am From Descartes' cogito, despite its failings, we can conclude that thoughts exist, or that awareness of those thoughts exists, or that the source of those thoughts exists; in short we can conclude that something exists, and therefore Objective Reality exists, and the thing that we originally identified as existing is all or part of it.

But that is the one and only thing we are able to prove (to Objective standards); all the rest is guesswork and supposition.
Let’s analyze what happens in Descartes.

The starting point is that we have a perception of existence that is questionable: we see objects, but we realize that their existence can be questioned, because our senses and our brain can be deceived in determine their real existence: they might be something different, they might be an illusion, they might not exist at all.

Since this is the starting situation, Descartes doesn’t notice that, as a consequence, based on this situation, we actually cannot determine the meaning of the verb “to be”, or “to exist”: all the experiences we have of this verb are unreliable, so, what are we saying we we use the verb “they exist”? We have no idea.

Then he turns his attention to his own experience of thinking, and applies to it the verb “to exist” to see if this way he can gain a strong certainty of it.

Here is one first inconsistency: how can we understand the existence of us thinking, by applying to it a verb whose meaning actually we don’t know?

Then he realizes that his subjective inner experience of feeling thinking is undeniable to him.
Here I appreciate what you wrote so clearly:
Pattern-chaser wrote: May 22nd, 2022, 8:53 am I can prove the above, to Objective standards, to myself alone. If you are to share my one piece of Objective knowledge, you must follow the same steps for yourself.
So, according to Descartes, we have, at this point, a clear and strong idea of the verb to exist, grounded on our subjective experience.
But now we have a second inconsistency: he thinks that this way he has gained an objective certainty, which is, a certainty that is not just an opinion, a personal feeling, but something undeniable. Undeniable means objective. But it looks like at this point Descartes has already forgotten that he based his certainty on an inner experience, which is, a subjective experience. How can we deduce an idea of objective, undeniable existence from an entirely subjective experience?

In other words: how do you know that I, by following the same steps for myself, will reach the same feeling of certainty? I can confirm this difficulty because some times I asked to people if they realize their feeling unique in this world in their feeling “I”; somebody answered that they didn’t feel unique at all, another one answered that he had no idea of this feeling.

The consequence of this is that you should question your feeling even about yourself: if other people in the world are unable to reach the same certainty by following your steps, you should wonder if perhaps something wrong, some mistake, some illusion is in your feeling and in your reasoning.

So, you can see that, if analyzed, Descartes’ reasoning, that seems so simple at first sight, “I think, then I am”, is actually a mess, a confusion between unknown meaning of the word, applied to an inner experience that is totally unclear as well, because it is 100% private, impossible to share, and by miracle this combination is able to give as a result an absolute, undeniable, objective certainty.
SteveKlinko
Posts: 710
Joined: November 19th, 2021, 11:43 am

Re: Is our reality just a construction?

Post by SteveKlinko »

Angelo Cannata wrote: May 22nd, 2022, 11:32 am
Pattern-chaser wrote: May 22nd, 2022, 8:53 am From Descartes' cogito, despite its failings, we can conclude that thoughts exist, or that awareness of those thoughts exists, or that the source of those thoughts exists; in short we can conclude that something exists, and therefore Objective Reality exists, and the thing that we originally identified as existing is all or part of it.

But that is the one and only thing we are able to prove (to Objective standards); all the rest is guesswork and supposition.
Let’s analyze what happens in Descartes.

The starting point is that we have a perception of existence that is questionable: we see objects, but we realize that their existence can be questioned, because our senses and our brain can be deceived in determine their real existence: they might be something different, they might be an illusion, they might not exist at all.

Since this is the starting situation, Descartes doesn’t notice that, as a consequence, based on this situation, we actually cannot determine the meaning of the verb “to be”, or “to exist”: all the experiences we have of this verb are unreliable, so, what are we saying we we use the verb “they exist”? We have no idea.

Then he turns his attention to his own experience of thinking, and applies to it the verb “to exist” to see if this way he can gain a strong certainty of it.

Here is one first inconsistency: how can we understand the existence of us thinking, by applying to it a verb whose meaning actually we don’t know?

Then he realizes that his subjective inner experience of feeling thinking is undeniable to him.
Here I appreciate what you wrote so clearly:
Pattern-chaser wrote: May 22nd, 2022, 8:53 am I can prove the above, to Objective standards, to myself alone. If you are to share my one piece of Objective knowledge, you must follow the same steps for yourself.
So, according to Descartes, we have, at this point, a clear and strong idea of the verb to exist, grounded on our subjective experience.
But now we have a second inconsistency: he thinks that this way he has gained an objective certainty, which is, a certainty that is not just an opinion, a personal feeling, but something undeniable. Undeniable means objective. But it looks like at this point Descartes has already forgotten that he based his certainty on an inner experience, which is, a subjective experience. How can we deduce an idea of objective, undeniable existence from an entirely subjective experience?

In other words: how do you know that I, by following the same steps for myself, will reach the same feeling of certainty? I can confirm this difficulty because some times I asked to people if they realize their feeling unique in this world in their feeling “I”; somebody answered that they didn’t feel unique at all, another one answered that he had no idea of this feeling.

The consequence of this is that you should question your feeling even about yourself: if other people in the world are unable to reach the same certainty by following your steps, you should wonder if perhaps something wrong, some mistake, some illusion is in your feeling and in your reasoning.

So, you can see that, if analyzed, Descartes’ reasoning, that seems so simple at first sight, “I think, then I am”, is actually a mess, a confusion between unknown meaning of the word, applied to an inner experience that is totally unclear as well, because it is 100% private, impossible to share, and by miracle this combination is able to give as a result an absolute, undeniable, objective certainty.
Descartes is saying he can have and does have Conscious Experiences, but the point he is making is that these Experiences are relative to not having any Experiences or to Nothingness itself. Your insistence that these Experiences have to be some sort of Objective clone of the External World in order to have any validity is Incoherent with Descartes intentions and Incoherent with what is Sensible and Logical. The point is that the very Existence of Experiences is the thing that makes us realize that we are not just Dust In the Wind and that there is more to the story than that.
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8268
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: Is our reality just a construction?

Post by Pattern-chaser »

The verbs we apply don't seem relevant; it's that there is something for us to apply those verbs to that is the point.

I don't think you will achieve a "feeling" of certainty; I think you will see that something exists, therefore Objective Reality exists, and that something must be all or part of it.

But let's not make ourselves unpopular by derailing this topic with an extended Objectivity discussion, OK? 🙏👍
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8268
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: Is our reality just a construction?

Post by Pattern-chaser »

Sorry, this is in reply to Angelo Cannata's last post: 😊
Angelo Cannata wrote: May 22nd, 2022, 11:32 am ...
Pattern-chaser wrote: May 22nd, 2022, 1:07 pm The verbs we apply don't seem relevant; it's that there is something for us to apply those verbs to that is the point.

I don't think you will achieve a "feeling" of certainty; I think you will see that something exists, therefore Objective Reality exists, and that something must be all or part of it.

But let's not make ourselves unpopular by derailing this topic with an extended Objectivity discussion, OK? 🙏👍
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
User avatar
Angelo Cannata
Posts: 182
Joined: April 17th, 2021, 10:02 am
Favorite Philosopher: Heidegger
Location: Cambridge, UK
Contact:

Re: Is our reality just a construction?

Post by Angelo Cannata »

Pattern-chaser wrote: May 22nd, 2022, 1:07 pm But let's not make ourselves unpopular by derailing this topic with an extended Objectivity discussion, OK? 🙏👍
I can’t understand how talking about objectivity is off-topic in this thread. What is in-topic?
User avatar
Angelo Cannata
Posts: 182
Joined: April 17th, 2021, 10:02 am
Favorite Philosopher: Heidegger
Location: Cambridge, UK
Contact:

Re: Is our reality just a construction?

Post by Angelo Cannata »

SteveKlinko wrote: May 22nd, 2022, 1:02 pm Descartes is saying he can have and does have Conscious Experiences, but the point he is making is that these Experiences are relative to not having any Experiences or to Nothingness itself. Your insistence that these Experiences have to be some sort of Objective clone of the External World in order to have any validity is Incoherent with Descartes intentions and Incoherent with what is Sensible and Logical. The point is that the very Existence of Experiences is the thing that makes us realize that we are not just Dust In the Wind and that there is more to the story than that.
I think this was a mistake made by Descartes: he didn’t realize that, as soon as he says “...I think”, he is making an objective statement. “I think...” refers to the inner, private, intimate experience, that actually is impossible to express, impossible to share. Otherwise he would have said “You see that I think, then you must admit that I exist”. Instead, his starting point is his inner experience of feeling himself thinking. This is entirely subjective. When he put it into words, by saying “I think...”, then it becomes automatically something objective, something considered as an external element put under his eyes, ready to be considered, evaluated, because putting it into words means telling something to yourself: you treat yourself like two people talking to each other, otherwise there would be no point in putting the experience into words. When he adds “then I think”, the process of objectification becomes even stronger, because a reasoning, a deduction is added.

This is the problem ignored by Descartes: how is that an inner experience is able to become the ground basis for an objective statement?
SteveKlinko
Posts: 710
Joined: November 19th, 2021, 11:43 am

Re: Is our reality just a construction?

Post by SteveKlinko »

Angelo Cannata wrote: May 22nd, 2022, 4:35 pm
SteveKlinko wrote: May 22nd, 2022, 1:02 pm Descartes is saying he can have and does have Conscious Experiences, but the point he is making is that these Experiences are relative to not having any Experiences or to Nothingness itself. Your insistence that these Experiences have to be some sort of Objective clone of the External World in order to have any validity is Incoherent with Descartes intentions and Incoherent with what is Sensible and Logical. The point is that the very Existence of Experiences is the thing that makes us realize that we are not just Dust In the Wind and that there is more to the story than that.
I think this was a mistake made by Descartes: he didn’t realize that, as soon as he says “...I think”, he is making an objective statement. “I think...” refers to the inner, private, intimate experience, that actually is impossible to express, impossible to share. Otherwise he would have said “You see that I think, then you must admit that I exist”. Instead, his starting point is his inner experience of feeling himself thinking. This is entirely subjective. When he put it into words, by saying “I think...”, then it becomes automatically something objective, something considered as an external element put under his eyes, ready to be considered, evaluated, because putting it into words means telling something to yourself: you treat yourself like two people talking to each other, otherwise there would be no point in putting the experience into words. When he adds “then I think”, the process of objectification becomes even stronger, because a reasoning, a deduction is added.

This is the problem ignored by Descartes: how is that an inner experience is able to become the ground basis for an objective statement?
When Descartes says I Think, I always took it as meaning, We Think. To me it was always obvious that he was assuming his Thinking was also done by each one of us, and he was just pointing out an obvious yet not too often realized fact of human existence. I don't quite understand how so many people try to contort his basic simple and true observation, that he extended to all of us, into all kinds of Philosophical Dilemmas. No Dilemmas actually exist and his observation is as valid today as was back then.
Post Reply

Return to “Epistemology and Metaphysics”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021